[PD] Re: [PD-dev] Re: prepend w/ set message - ignore

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

This sounds like a perfect comprimise!  I can't think of any serious 
disadvantages to this.

.hc

On Nov 12, 2004, at 11:30 AM, Krzysztof Czaja wrote:

> hi all,
>
> Frank Barknecht wrote:
> ...
>> yes, there are these cases and those cases. However, the limitation of
>> [prepend] is not annoying enough to break compatibility, IMO. ALso you
>
> in case of prepend, I think, there is a compromise possible.  An
> object would get the second inlet, but only when instantiated,
> max-incompatibly, without arguments.  The 'set' method would still
> modify the argument, but only if a) creation arguments were
> provided, and b) the global max-compatibility flag was set.
> Otherwise, the 'set' method would call the 'anything' method.
>
> I do not think, it is a good idea to have a [prepend this] in
> a patch, which actually prepends 'that' (after being set to
> 'that').  Such objects should read just [prepend].
>
> I wonder, how many maxers use the 'set' feature of prepend?  Or if
> they tend to use zl join, perhaps?
>
> Interestingly, sending a single word 'set' to a prepend crashes
> Max on the next message to the object...  I am talking about,
> 4.3.2, the last version I was determined enough to find money
> for...
>
> Which is why my advocatus diaboli role is on halt...
>
> Krzysztof
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> 
> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
>

                                     http://at.or.at/hans/